Should have left Salvation Army in the cold
It is unfortunate that The Seattle Times has once again included the Salvation Army as one of its Fund For The Needy recipients [“When times are tough, finding a way to give,” page one, Nov. 22]. This is inappropriate for two reasons.
First, the primary mission of the Salvation Army, which describes itself as evangelical, is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. For example, hungry men who want a meal must first sit through Christian sermons.
The Salvation Army is certainly free to push its religion on the vulnerable, but it’s offensive for The Times to ask a diverse community — including Jews, Hindus, atheists, and other non-Christians — to support Christian proselytizing. There are many organizations, such as Northwest Harvest, that help those in need without also trying to convert them.
Second, the Salvation Army discriminates. In 2001, it agreed to back former President George W. Bush’s faith-based initiative if Bush pushed for regulations allowing the Salvation Army to discriminate against gays when filling taxpayer-funded jobs and providing domestic-partner benefits. In 2005, the Salvation Army won a court case that allowed it to fire non-Christian employees, even though those positions were publicly funded.
Finally, The Times article never mentioned the evangelical nature of the Salvation Army when asking for donations. Just slipped your mind?
— Matthew J. Barry, Issaquah